THE 


REASONS  WHY. 


By  EDWARD  C.  GRAVES. 


SHOWING  why  Brooklyn  rent-payers,  mechanics  and  working 
people  should  favor  the  consolidation  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn 
into  one  city.  Also  showing  the  great  benefit  to  New  York  from 
such  consolidation.  SEQUEL  to  the  consolidation  pamphlet 
<*  How  Taxes  in  Brooklyn  can  be  reduced  one-half." 


CONSOLIDATION  PAMPHLET  No.  2 


COPIES  FREE: 

To  l)e  had  at  Headquarters  CONSOLIDATION  LEAGUE,  Room  314,  No.  189  Montague  Street, 
Brooklynj  Headquarters  CONSOLIDATION  COMMISSION,  214  Broadway,  New  York,  and  at  the 
BROOKLYN  REAL  ESTATE  EXCHANGE. 


lEx  IGtbrtfi 


SEYMOUR  DURST 


"t '  ~Tort  nivuw  ^Amfltrda-nu  of  Je  Manhatarus 


When  you  leave,  please  leave  this  book 

Because  it  has  been  said 
"Ever'thing  comes  t'  him  who  waits 

Except  a  loaned  book." 


OLD   YORK   LIBRARY  -  OLD   YORK  FOUNDATION 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gii  r  of  Seymour  B.  Durs  i  Old  York  Library 


THE 


REASONS  WHY. 

By  EDWARD  C.  GRAVES. 


SHOWING  why  Brooklyn  rent-payers,  mechanics  and  working 
people  should  favor  the  consolidation  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn 
into  one  city.  Also  showing  the  great  benefit  to  New  York  from 
such  consolidation.  SEQUEL  to  the  consolidation  pamphlet 
"  How  Taxes  in  Brooklyn  can  be  reduced  one-half." 


CONSOLIDATION  PAMPHLET  No.  2. 

COPIES  FREE. 

To  be  had  at  Headquarters  CONSOLIDATION  LEAGUE,  Room  314,  No.  189  Montague  Street, 
Brooklyn ;  Headquarters  CONSOLIDATION  COMMISSION,  214  Broadway,  New  York,  and  at  tht 
BROOKLYN  REAL  ESTATE  EXCHANGE. 


COMMISSION 

OF 

Municipal  Consolidation  Inquiry. 


Chapter  311,  Laws  of  1890 


Campbell  W.  Adams,  . 
John  H.  Brinckerhoff,  . 
George  R.  Cathcart,  . 
Frederic  W.  Devoe, 
Andrew  H.  Green, 
George  G.  Greenfield, 
John  L.  Hamilton, 
Edward  F.  Linton, 
Charts  P.  McClelland, 
J.  S.  T.  Stranahan, 
Calvert  Vaux,  . 
William  D.  Veeder, 


5IONERS. 

State  Engineer  and  Surveyor 
.    Queens  County. 

New  York. 
.  New  York. 
New  York. 
Richmond  County. 
New  York. 
Brooklyn. 

Westchester  County. 
.  Brooklyn. 

New  York. 
.    Kings  County. 


Andrew  H.  Green,  President. 

J.  S.  T.  Stranahan,  Vice-President. 

Albert  E.  Henschel,  Secretary. 


H.  A.  ROST,  PRINTER,  14  FRANKFORT  ST.,  N.  Y. 


Mr.  President  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Consolidation  Commission : 

In  response  to  your  request  for  a  continuation  of  the  argument 
before  you,  which  led  to  the  publication  of  the  consolidation  pamphlet 
"An  Appeal  to  Reason;"  or,  "How  taxes  in  Brooklyn  can  be  reduced 
one-half,"  I  will  start  at  the  point  where  that  pamphlet  leaves  off,  viz., 
the  reduction  of  Brooklyn  taxes  one-half  by  the  consolidation  of  the 
cities. 

While  it  is  true  that  the  bill  (Chapter  64,  laws  1894)  submitting 
the  matter  to  a  popular  vote  does  not  contain  a  clause  providing  that 
the  taxes  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  shall  be  equalized  as  a  condition 
of  the  consolidation,  yet  we  all  know  that  New  York  has  never  yet 
annexed  any  territory  without  equalizing  the  taxes  of  the  annexed 
territory  with  its  own.  This  was  the  case  with  the  annexation  to  New 
York  of  the  Towns  of  Morrisania,  West  Farms,  and  Kingsbridge,  in 
1874.  In  each  of  which  cases  a  popular  vote  was  first  taken  under  a 
special  act  (Chapter  613,  laws  1873),  which  vote  resulting  in  a  majority 
in  favor  of  annexation,  was  followed  the  next  year  by  an  act  of  the 
Legislature  absolutely  and  permanently  annexing  to  New  York  the 
towns  voting  in  its  favor.    See  Chapter  329,  laws  of  1874. 

.  Precisely  in  the  same  pathway  Brooklyn  and  Long  Island  City  are 
now  proceeding,  viz. :  First,  the  passage  of  a  law  providing  for  the 
ascertaining  of  public  sentiment  by  taking  a  vote  "For"  and  "Against" 
consolidation  in  the  localities  affected  by  it,  so  that  it  may  be  known 
which  side  has  the  most  supporters,  to  the  end  that  being  known 
and  officially  declared,  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  American 
Government,  "the  majority  shall  rule,"  may  then  be  followed.  The 
law  has  been  passed,  the  die  cast,  and  in  November,  1894,  the  vote  wili 
be  taken,  upon  the  result  of  which  the  future  of  New  York  and  Brook- 
lyn so  largely  depends.  If  such  vote  shows  a  majority  in  its  favor, 
then  in  the  winter  of  1895  such  further  legislation  will  be  had  as  will 
carry  out  the  wishes  of  the  majority  and  cause  the  careful  pre- 
paration of  a  proper  charter  to  govern  the  consolidated  city. 

The  first  question  that  arises  to  the  mind  of  the  Brooklyn  tax- 
payer then  is:  if  he  votes  for  it,  will  his  taxes  in  case  of  such  con- 
solidation certainly  be  lowered  to  the  level  of  New  York  taxes  without 
a  clause  to  that  effect  being  in  the  bill  submitting  the  matter  to  a  vote  ? 

To  which  I  unquestionably  answer,  Yes.  When  the  cities  come  to 
be  actually  united  all  necessary  laws  providing  for  but  one  and  a 
uniform  rate  of  taxation  in  the  consolidated  city  will  certainly  be 


4 


enacted.  Any  other  kind  of  consolidation  would  be  a  crime  towards 
Brooklyn.  Again,  with  the  precedents  of  the  three  towns  above  quoted, 
having  been  taken  into  New  York,  and  their  taxes  not  only  equalized 
with  New  York,  but  the  towns  presented  with  a  part  ownership  of  the 
Brooklyn  ferry  and  water  front  franchises,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  for 
one  moment  that  Brooklyn  itself  will  not  be  equally  as  well  treated. 

You  may  therefore  take  it  for  granted  that  when  New  York  and 
Brooklyn  are  merged  into  one  city  it  will  be  upon  a  basis  of  equal 
taxation,  equal  rights  to  all.  Any  other  kind  of  consolidation  would 
not  stand  one  year  before  it  would  be  repealed  and  made  equal,  or 
the  political  party  opposing  it  be  wiped  out  of  power  by  the  voters 
in  Brooklyn.  Assuming,  as  I  undertand  to  be  the  case,  that  you  are 
now  convinced  of  two  things :  first,  by  the  facts  and  figures  set  forth  in 
the  other  pamphlet  spoken  of,  that  equalizing  the  New  York  and 
Brooklyn  tax  rates  and  tax  valuations  will  reduce  Brooklyn  taxes  about 
50  per  cent,  without  perceptibly  increasing  New  York  taxes ;  and 
secondly,  that  such  equalization  will  certainly  be  had  and  fully  provided 
for  as  a  part  of  the  legislation  necessary  to  carry  out  and  effect  a 
union  of  the  cities  j  I  will  in  this  pamphlet  start  at  that  point  and 
endeavor  to  show  you  how  the  rent-payer,  the  working  man,  the  working 
woman,  the  mechanic,  the  laborer,  of  both  cities  will  be  benefited; 
and  in  particular  how  New  York  will  gain  advantage. 

Before  picking  up  the  threads  of  argument  and  weaving  them  into 
one  harmonious  whole,  let  us  give  a  hasty  glance  backward  and  view 
the  rise  and  progress  of  the  consolidation  movement  from  its  start  down 
to  the  present  day.  So  that  Ave  may  know  where  we  stand  and  why  it 
is  that  these  two  great  cities  now  about  to  be  joined  have  not  before 
been  made  one.  The  East  River  is  almost  as  wide  to-day  as  it  ever 
was.  The  residents  of  Brooklyn  are  no  more  dependent  on  New  York 
now  than  they  have  been  at  any  time  for  ages  past.  Indeed,  in  many 
respects  they  are  not  nearly  as  much  so  as  in  former  years ;  yet  we  all 
admit  that  these  two  great  cities  are  now  on  the  eve  of  becoming  one, 
and  that  for  the  first  time  in  the  long  and  tortuous  history  of  the  con- 
solidation movement,  success  is  within  its  grasp  and  its  object  about  to 
be  accomplished. 

II. 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CONSOLIDATION  MOVEMENT. 

No  man  can  say  who  first  suggested  consolidation  of  the  cities. 
It  is  not  a  new  idea,  but  one  very  old,  having  been  discussed  more 


5 


than  one  hundred  years  ago.  In  fact,  the  idea  suggests  itself  from  the 
close  proximity  of  the  two  cities.  As  late  as  the  years  1830  to  1834 
Brooklyn  was  refused  a  city  charter  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of 
New  York,  because  the  Legislature  said  that  the  annexation  of  Brooklyn 
to  New  York  was  a  case  of  manifest  destiny,  bound  to  occur  so  very 
soon,  that  there  was  no  object  in  giving  Brooklyn  a  city  charter,  as  it 
would  simply  be  a  waste  of  time.  That  was  sixty  years  ago  and 
Brooklyn  has  not  been  annexed  yet.    Let  me  quote  from  history. 

Stiles  History  of  Kings  County  on  page  145,  says: 

"  1834,  January,  the  Brooklyn  people,  undaunted  by  their  previous  defeats 
and  confident  in  their  own  resources  and  the  justice  of  their  claims,  again 
renewed  their  application  to  the  Legislature  for  a  city  charter.  The  city  of 
New  York  still  threw  the  whole  weight  of  her  wealth  and  influence  against  the 
movement,  objecting  that  the  limits  of  the  city  of  New  York  ought  to  include 
the  whole  of  Kings  County  and  Richmond  County;  that  the  period  was  not  far 
distant,  when  a  population  of  not  less  than  2,000,000  would  be  contained 
within  New  York,  Kings  and  Richmond  Counties;  that  all  commercial  cities 
are  natural  rivals  and  competitors,  and  that  contentions,  inconvenience  and  other 
calamities  grow  out  of  such  rivalries;  that  a  previous  act  of  the  Legislature 
passed  in  1821,  incorporating  the  village  of  Brooklyn,  was  an  encroachment  on 
the  rights  of  New  York." 

A  hard  struggle  then  took  place  in  the  Legislature,  the  New  York 
City  members  clamoring  that  Brooklyn  should  be  annexed  to  New  York 
and  not  made  a  separate  city,  fought  the  charter  and  did  their  best  to 
defeat  it.  Public  feeling  ran  high,  meetings  were  held,  speeches  made, 
and  excitement  grew  to  fever  heat.  New  York  to  a  man  willing  to 
annex  Brooklyn,  but  vehemently  opposed  to  a  separate  charter  for  it, 
and  Brooklyn,  taking  exactly  the  opposite  position,  viz.,  to  a  man  in 
favor  of  its  separate  city  charter  and  vehemently  opposed  to  annexation. 

At  length,  with  the  aid  of  up  country  Senators  and  Assemblymen 
Brooklyn  triumphed,  and  on  April  8,  1834,  after  a  Legislative  battle  of 
three  months  and  an  actual  fight  of  over  three  years,  Brooklyn  secured 
the  coveted  city  charter;  and  that  was  the  last  that  was  heard  of 
annexation  to  New  York  for  over  twenty  years. 

In  1856,  Cyrus  P.  Smith,  then  State  Senator  from  Kings  County, 
introduced  a  resolution  in  the  State  Senate  looking  towards  the  con- 
solidation of  New  York  and  Brooklyn;  the  New  York  newspapers  spoke 
well  of  it;  but  Brooklyn,  as  usual,  showed  itself  vehemently  opposed, 
and  after  a  little  discussion  the  resolution  was  defeated  and  the  matter 
dropped. 


6 


On  April  23d,  1857,  while  Fernando  Wood  was  Mayor  of  New 
York,  the  " Metropolitan  Police  Act"  went  into  effect,  whereby  New 
York  and  Brooklyn  police  with  those  of  surrounding  Country  towns 
were  by  law  merged  into  one,  placed  under  a  single  control  and  called 
the  "Metropolitan  Police  Department."  It  was  afterwards  followed  by 
similar  "Acts,"  merging  into  one  the  fire  and  health  departments  of  the 
cities.  The  hopes  of  consolidationists  then  ran  high,  for  it  was  believed 
that  these  "Acts"  would  effect  speedy  annexation  of  the  cities  them- 
selves. But,  alas,  for  human  hopes,  they  did  not  have  such  effect;  and 
on  April  5th,  1870,  after  a  fitful  existence  of  thirteen  years,  the  "Met- 
ropolitan Police  Act"  with  its  co-acts  were  repealed,  and  Brooklyn 
given  control  of  its  own  departments.  And  with  it  all  visions  of  con- 
solidation of  the  cities  again  faded  into  thin  air. 

About  the  year  1872,  Mr.  John  Winslow  of  Brooklyn  secured 
the  names  of  several  thousand  people,  residents  of  New  York  and 
Brooklyn,  to  a  petition,  asking  that  the  matter  of  annexing  Brooklyn  to 
New  York  be  submitted  to  a  popular  vote  and  presented  the  same  to 
the  Legislature;  the  newspapers  casually  mentioned  it,  showing  that 
the  drift  of  public  opinion  in  New  York  was  favorable,  but  that  in 
Brooklyn  was  opposed;  a  bill  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  and  after 
discussion  was  defeated  by  the  Brooklyn  members  and  the  matter  again 
passed  out  of  sight.  Occasionally  since  then  some  New  York  news- 
paper has  contained  a  vigorous  editorial  or  a  column  of  interviews  with 
leading  citizens  favoring  consolidation  of  the  cities,  only  to  be  followed 
by  some  equally  vigorous  editorial  in  a  Brooklyn  newspaper  and  another 
column  of  interviews  opposing  it.  Other  newspapers  would  then 
comment  in  a  listless  manner  on  Brooklyn's  stubborness,  and  the  breeze 
which  sprang  up  would  die  out.  Various  spasmodic  attempts  have 
been  made  by  different  people  to  merge  the  two  cities  into  one,  but 
all  without  avail,  for  while  New  York  was  in  favor  of  it,  Brooklyn 
continued  to  be  vehemently  opposed. 

For  over  thirty  years,  Andrew  H.  Green  of  New  York,  and  James 
S.  T.  Stranahan  of  Brooklyn,  have  battled  bravely  for  consolidation  of 
the  cities,  at  times  standing  almost  alone  in  the  movement,  suffering 
defeat  upon  defeat,  yet  they  have  never  faltered  or  flinched  in  the  perform- 
ance of  their  great  work.  After  repeated  attempts  by  Mr.  Stranahan 
and  Mr.  Green,  the  Legislature  in  1890  passed  a  bill  authorizing  the 
formation  of  this  commission  to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  consoli- 
dating the  various  municipalities  located  around  the  Bay  of  New  York, 


7 


and  report  their  opinion  to  the  Legislature.  Several  such  reports  have 
been  made  from  time  to  time,  but  until  1894  none  of  them  were  adopted 
or  favorably  acted  upon  by  the  Legislature. 

In  1891,  the  Brooklyn  tax  question,  a  problem  hitherto  unsolved, 
began  to  receive  attention  as  a  consolidation  measure,  and  was  forced 
to  the  front  by  those  who  believed  it  to  be  the  key  of  the  situation. 
From  that  time  public  sentiment  in  Brooklyn  began  to  grow.  In 
1893,  a  consolidation  league  was  formed  in  Brooklyn  by  those  con- 
verted to  the  support  of  the  movement  through  the  new  treatment 
of  the  Brooklyn  tax  question.  A  public  meeting  was  held  and  a 
committee  of  two  hundred  Brooklyn  citizens  appointed,  who  chartered 
a  special  train,  and  on  March  8th?  1893,  journeyed  to  Albany,  made 
speeches  before  the  Legislature  and  asked  that  the  matter  be  sub- 
mitted to  a  popular  vote.  A  bill  to  that  effect  was  introduced  but, 
through  the  vehement  opposition  of  the  Brooklyn  representatives  in  the 
Legislature,  failed  to  become  a  law.  The  consolidation  league  undis- 
mayed kept  up  their  good  fight,  distributed  their  literature,  confined  to 
the  single  point  of  the  reduction  of  Brooklyn  taxes  j  30,000  copies  of 
the  pamphlet  spoken  of  were  distributed,  and  public  sentiment  in  Brooklyn 
grew  in  favor  of  consolidation  with  amazing  rapidity.  State  senators 
and  members  of  Assembly  favorable  to  the  movement  were  elected,  and 
in  1894  a  bill  submitting  the  matter  to  a  popular  vote  was  passed  by 
both  houses  of  the  Legislature  with  scarcely  a  dissenting  vote.  So  great 
was  the  change  in  public  sentiment  on  this  point. 

During  all  previous  years,  while  New  York  had  been  passively  in 
favor  of  consolidation  of  the  cities,  Brooklyn  had  been  vehemently  op- 
posed to  it.  Brooklyn  people  said  they  could  see  where  New  York  would 
be  benefited  by  its  aggrandizement  from,  the  absorption  of  Brooklyn,  the 
addition  to  its  population,  to  its  many  miles  of  streets,  etc. ;  but  they  could 
not  see  where  Brooklyn  would  gain  anything  in  return  for  being  wiped 
out  of  existence.  Any  man  having  a  fortune  of  a  million  is  always 
ready  to  add  another  million  to  it.  And  what  is  true  of  a  single  indi- 
vidual is  true  of  a  city.  Any  city  of  a  million  or  two  million  of  inhabi- 
tants is  always  ready  to  increase  its  fortunes  by  the  addition  of  another 
million.  It  is  human  nature  the  world  over.  But  it  is  also  human 
nature  for  the  other  fellow  to  be  unwilling  to  give  up  his  million,  or  any 
part  of  it,  to  oblige  his  more  wealthy  neighbor,  or  the  other  city  to 
surrender  its  charter  at  the  request  of  a  competitor. 


4 


8 


What  practical  benefit  will  consolidation  be  to  Brooklyn?  or  to 
use  a  commonplace  expression:  What  is  Brooklyn  "going  to  get 
out  of  it?"  is  a  question  that  until  within  the  last  three  years 
has  never  been  successfully  answered.  Whenever  the  subject 
has  been  agitated,  like  Banquo's  ghost,  up  came  that  question: 
"What  benefit  will  it  be  to  Brooklyn?"  Never  an  answer.  For 
over  one  hundred  years  that  question  has  been  repeated,  and 
for  over  one  hundred  years  deep  silence  has  been  the  only  reply. 
Therefore,  Brooklyn  opposed  consolidation  or  annexation,  as  it  was  then 
called,  and  continued  to  oppose  it,  as  by  right  it  should,  if  no  benefit 
would  result.  It  is  no  light  thing  this,  asking  a  great  city  to  surrender 
its  charter  and  voluntarily  go  out  of  existence.  For  hundreds  of  years 
charter  rights  have  been  zealously  guarded,  great  wars  have  been, 
carried  on  and  thousands  of  people  slain  defending  charter  rights.  Our 
own  "Charter  Oak"  of  Hartford,  was  a  tree  made  famous  the  world 
over,  because  a  handful  of  English  colonists  in  Connecticut  risked  their 
lives  and  hid  their  charter  in  the  old  oak  tree,  rather  than  surrender  it 
or  alloAV  one  single  line  of  its  provisions  to  be  cancelled;  yet  we,  a  city 
of  one  million  people,  numbering  more  souls  than  one-third  the  total 
white  popidation  of  America  at  the  time  the  charter  oak,  within  its 
shaggy  bark,  preserved  for  Connecticut  those  sacred  rights,  are  asked 
peaceably  to  surrender  our  charter  rights  and  without  protest  give  up 
our  charter,  go  out  of  existence  forever,  and  wipe  the  name  of  Brooklyn 
off  the  face  of  the  earth,  as  one  would  wipe  it  from  a  slate  with  a  damp 
sponge,  merging  it  into  and  making  it  part  of  the  "Greater  New  York." 
And  while  I  am  most  earnestly  in  favor  of  such  course,  believing  it  to 
be  Brooklyn's  only  salvation  from  impending  bankruptcy  and  financial 
ruin,  yet  it  is  not  a  matter  to  be  lightly  considered  or  hastily  done. 
That  question,  that  eternal  question:  "What  practical  benefit  will  it  be 
to  Brooklyn,"  having  now  for  the  first  time  been  successfully  answered 
by  the  demonstration  that  it  will  reduce  taxes  about  one-half  on  every 
foot  of  real  estate  in  Brooklyn,  whether  owned  by  man,  woman  or  child,, 
it  remains  to  be  shown  what  benefits  other  than  the  dollars  and  cents 
thus  saved  to  the  Brooklyn  tax-payer  will  accrue  from  consolidation 
of  the  cities,  and  who  it  is  that  will  receive  those  benefits?  To  ascer- 
tain this  we  must  take  up  the  Brooklyn  and  New  York  sides  of  the 
question  separately,  and  treat  them  from  different  standpoints,  each  side 
having  its  own  separate  benefits;  which,  however,  when  the  cities  are 
consolidated  will  redound  to  the  benefit  of  all  concerned. 


9 


III. 

BROOKLYN  BENEFITS. 

And  first  as  to  Brooklyn:  So  far  as  Brooklynites  are  concerned, 
we  must  take  that  most  perplexing  problem,  the  Brooklyn  tax  question, 
and  its  successful  solution  by  consolidation  of  the  cities  as  our  starting 
point  or  fountain-head  from  which  the  other  benefits  flow.  All  the 
evils  of  which  Brooklyn  complains,  either  spring  from  and  grow  out  of 
its  excessive  taxation  or  they  are  remediable  without  consolidation. 
Dishonest  city  government  can  be  remedied  by  simply  voting  "the 
rascals  out''  to  whatever  party  they  may  belong.  But  the  terrible 
incubus,  the  crushing  weight  that  Brooklyn  labors  under  of  an  excessive 
and  constantly  increasing  rate  of  taxation,  notwithstanding  honest 
administration  of  city  affairs,  can  only  be  remedied  by  consolidation  of 
the  cities.  Like  all  other  political  changes  the  consolidation  movement 
is  one  of  slow  growth  in  Brooklyn.  It  is  no  easy  task  to  convert  a 
million  people. 

Brooklyn  is  to-day  one  of  the  most  excessively  taxed  cities  in  the 
United  States.  Its  average  taxes  for  year  1893-1894  are  $2.85-^-  per 
$100  of  property,  on  a  tax  valuation  of  from  70  to  100  per  cent,  of  the 
actual  value  of  the  property;  while  New  York  tax-rate  is  but  $1.82  per 
$100,  on  a  tax  valuation  averaging  less  than  50  per  cent,  of  the  actual 
value  of  the  property  taxed.  The  State  Board  of  Tax  Assessors,  after  a ' 
most  searching  examination  on  this  point,  certify  under  oath  that  the 
average  assessed  valuation  of  property  for  taxes  in  New  York  County 
is  only  44^-  per  cent,  of  its  actual  value,  and  that  in  Brooklyn  it  is  70 
per  cent,  of  its  actual  value  (see  page  22  of  the  pamphlet  before  referred 
to).  Since  the  State  Board  made  their  report  on  this  point  in  1890, 
Brooklyn  taxes  have  been  increased  three  times  successively;  to  wit,  in 
the  years  1891,  1892,  1893,  and  New  York  taxes  have  been  corres- 
pondingly reduced  three  successive  times  in  the  same  years,  so  that  the 
difference  in  the  taxation  of  the  two  cities  is  now  twelve  per  cent, 
greater  than  it  was  when  the  State  Board  made  their  report  in  1890. 

Why  this  situation  is  bound  to  exist  even  with  honest  administration 
of  city  affairs  in  both  cities,  I  have  endeavored  to  point  out  in  the  pages 
of  the  other  pamphlet. 

Without  going  over  the  same  ground  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the 
geographical  situation  of  the  two  cities  and  the  widely  different  nature 
of  taxable  property  situated  in  them,   caused  by  that  geographical 


10 


situation,  is  such,  that  it  gives  New  York  the  business  property,  great 
corporations,  and  water  front  franchises  properly  belonging  to  both 
cities ;  therefore,  the  great  difference  in  the  tax  rates  is  bound  to  exist 
and  will  continue  to  exist  until  the  two  cities  are  merged  into  one. 
And  the  longer  they  remain  separate  the  worse  the  present  state  of 
affairs  will  be. 

IV. 

THE  RENT-PAYER  BENEFITED. 

Having  settled  in  our  minds  that  the  Brooklyn  tax-payers  will  be 
benefited  by  consolidation  of  the  cities,  the  next  question  is,  who  are 
the  tax-payers? 

The  rent-payer  is  the  tax-payer,  not  the  real  estate  owner.  The 
owner  adds  his  taxes  on  to  his  rents,  divides  it  among  his  tenants, 
collects  it  back  from  them;  so  that  the  rent-payer  and  not  the  landlord 
is  the  actual  tax-payer. 

Extortionately  high  taxes  on  real  estate  give  a  place  a  bad  name. 
Nobody  will  lend  money  or  do  business  in  a  town  loaded  to  death  with 
taxes  if  he  can  help  it.  Brooklyn  has  to  pay  one-half  to  one  per  cent, 
higher  interest  on  its  bonds  than  New  York,  simply  on  that  account. 
The  men  who  suffer  most  by  it  are  comparatively  one  real  estate 
owner,  one  real  estate  agent,  a  thousand  brick-layers,  carpenters, 
•plumbers,  masons,  painters,  paper-hangers,  and  others  engaged  in  the 
building  trades,  who  with  quarry-men,  the  stoneyard  men,  brick-maker, 
lumber-yard  keeper,  and  others  engaged  in  manufacturing  building 
materials,  the  teamster  who  hauls  them,  and  the  butcher,  baker,  candle- 
stick maker  and  other  store-keepers  who  sell  goods  to  them  and  receive 
pay  out  of  the  money  earned  by  them  in  the  building  trades,  with  the 
families  of  all  of  them,  compose  the  entire  city  of  Brooklyn.  So  then 
when  you  say  that  nothing  but  real  estate  interests  and  its  dependencies 
in  Brooklyn  will  be  benefited  by  consolidation,  you  state  the  truth. 
But  that's  all  there  is,  you  have  got  the  whole,  how  can  you  have  any 
more  ?  To  say  that  nobody  in  Brooklyn  except  those  thus  directly  or 
indirectly  interested  in  real  estate  matters  will  be  benefited  by  con- 
solidation of  the  cities,  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  nobody  except  every 
man,  woman  and  child  in  Brooklyn  will  be  benefited  by  it. 

Who  then  oppose  it?  Only  certain  office  holders  and  city  con- 
tractors engaged  in  getting  rich  out  of  the  public  crib,  and  who  fear 
that  consolidation  of  the  cities  will  cnuse  the  loss  of  their  jobs,  oppose 


J 1 


it!  And  even  these,  with  honest  administration,  do  not  need  to  fear4  itj 
there  must  of  a  necessity  be  just  as  many  policemen,  firemen,  and 
other  placemen  then  as  now,  and  they  would  be  paid  the  same  salaries 
as  the  New  York  policemen,  firemen,  school  teachers,  and  other  place 
holders  of  the  same  class;  and  be  furthermore  placed  beyond  danger  of 
oss  of  their  places  or  loss  of  their  chance  of  promotion  by  accidental 
loss  of  political  pull. 

High  taxation  of  real  estate  affects  the  poor  even  more  than  it  does 
the  rich.  It  reaches  further  than  any  other  one  thing  on  this  earth 
and  radiates  in  a  thousand  different  directions,  each  direction  working 
a  separate  injury,  the  land  or  building  taxed  being  only  the  smallest 
part  of  it.  Let  us  see:  Excessive  taxation  prevents  building,  because 
no  person  will  buy  a  building  which,  when  completed,  will  be  loaded 
down  with  taxes  so  heavy  as  to  make  it  an  unprofitable  building. 
Therefore  the  mason,  bricklayer,  carpenter,  plumber,  painter,  tin- 
roofer,  and  others  engaged  in  the  building  trades  must  go  unemployed. 
And  earning  no  money  they  cannot  pay  their  butcher,  baker  or  grocer ; 
he  not  getting  his  dues  in  time  fails  or  is  driven  out  of  business.  So 
also  with  all  others  whose  occupations  depend  on  building,  such  as  the 
lumber-yard  keeper,  stoneyard  men,  lime  and  plaster  mill  men,  day 
laborers,  teamsters,  &c.  These  all  being  in  hard  lines  purchase  no 
goods  of  the  big  merchant,  who,  in  his  turn  feeling  the  lines  tighten  and 
knowing  of  his  own  increased  taxes,  reduces  his  expenses,  discharges 
clerks  and  cuts  down  salaries,  thus  producing  more  distress.  The  poor 
tired  clerk  and  shop-girl,  through  no  fault  of  theirs,  then  go  home 
discharged  or  with  but  half  salary,  there  to  disappoint  the  loved  ones 
depending  on  them.  Like  the  unemployed  mason  and  carpenter  across 
the  hall  they  have  no  money  for  the  landlord,  dispossession  for  non- 
payment of  rent  stares  them  in  the  face,  they  become  sick  at  heart  and 
so  thoroughly  discouraged  that  the  very  stones  in  the  streets  appear 
their  enemies  and  gay  colored  pictures  on  dead  walls  they  pass  seem  to 
mock  them.  The  biting  wind  whistles  and  howls  around  their  little 
attic  home  as  it  surely  never  did  before.  It  tells  the  wife  that  she  is  a 
tax-payer,  because  her  husband  being  out  of  work  on  account  of  such 
high  taxes  on  real  estate  that  it  renders  his  trade  unprofitable ;  she  must 
therefore  go  without  the  comfortable  sacque  promised  her  for  this 
winter  as  her  contribution  to  the  tax  on  real  estate.  It  tells  the  child 
that  it  also  is  a  tax-payer ;  because,  for  the  same  reason,  it  can  have  no 
toys  for  Christmas.    It  tells  them  all  of  grim  gaunt  hunger  and  want  in 


12 


store,  and  some  times  whispers  that  the  only  escape  from  payment  of 
those  taxes  is  the  river — the  black  and  silent  river. 

Why !  The  babe  in  the  cradle,  who  for  such  reason  must  go  without 
its  Sunday  frock,  is  one  of  the  real  tax-payers  of  Brooklyn.  Xot  the 
landlord  who  drives  by  in  his  carriage,  collecting  his  taxes  back  in  his 
rents  or  dispossessing  the  tenants  for  non-payment  of  them.  His  wife 
and  child  are  not  troubled  with  taxes;  his  child  will  never  be  deprived 
of  its  Christmas  toys,  nor  his  wife  go  without  her  sealskin  wraps  and 
diamond  earings  on  account  of  the  taxes  on  this  flat  building  or  that 
tenement  house.  Oh,  no !  It  is  the  rent-payer  in  those  buildings,  not 
the  landlord,  who  pays  the  taxes, — oftentimes  by  skimping  and  pinching 
the  rent-payer's  family  to  do  it.  Few,  and  you  may  say  none  of  those 
rent-paying  people  know  that  high  taxation,  not  only  of  the  house  they 
live  in  but  of  other  houses  and  other  lands  in  the  same  city  with  which 
they  have  nothing  to  do,  and  probably  never  saw,  is  the  real  cause  of 
their  distress. 

Such  is  the  history  of  excessive  taxation,  not  in  Brooklyn  alone, 
but  in  every  city  and  in  all  countries  on  the  face  of  the  earth. 

Every  kind  of  business  and  property  except  real  estate  has  its  own. 
separate  vicissitudes,  which  do  not  affect  or  concern  to  any  great  extent 
other  kinds  of  property  or  other  trades  or  lines  of  business.  Not  so 
with  real  estate,  on  which  we  are  all  dependent  in  one  way  or  another 
for  a  home  and  a  roof  to  shelter  us.  Its  excessive  taxation  paralyzes 
all  industries  doing  business  in  the  community  so  taxed,  and  affects 
most  those  who,  like  the  babe  in  the  cradle,  are  most  helpless  against  it 
and  least  able  to  stand  it. 

That  man  is  a  fool  who  says  that  because  he  does  not  own  the  real 
estate  he  rents  that  he  does  not  therefore  in  one  way  or  another  pay 
the  taxes  on  it  and  is  not  concerned  in  the  reduction  of  its  taxes  one- 
half  by  consolidation  of  the  cities.  What  effect  the  reduction  of 
Brooklyn  taxes  fifty  per  cent,  by  consolidation,  in  addition  to  the  re- 
duction  obtained  by  honest  administration  of  city  affairs  will  be,  you 
can  judge  as  well  as  I.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  exactly  the  opposite 
picture  will  be  presented,  buildings  by  the  hundreds  of  every  kind  will 
be  seen  going  up,  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of  mechanics  will 
be  employed  at  good  wages,  in  turn  patronizing  those  around  them, 
shopkeepers  again  busy ;  the  wife,  the  child,  and  the  babe,  having  paid 
their  taxes,  are  again  happy.  And  this  prosperity,  mark  you !  will  not 
be  a  temporary  boom  like  a  world's  fair:  but  permanent,  necessarily 


13 


permanent,  because  the  inducing  cause  of  that  prosperity,  the  con- 
solidation of  the  cities,  will  be  permanent.  The  persons  who  will,  there- 
fore, receive  the  greatest  and  most  immediate  benefit  from  consolidation 
of  the  cities  and  its  consequent  fifty  per  cent,  reduction  of  Brooklyn 
taxes  are  the  working  men  and  working  women,  the  mechanics, 
laborers,  and  rent-payers  of  both  cities,  and  to  them,  far  more 
than  to  the  land  oivner,  the  consolidation  of  the  cities  ivill  be  a  veritable 
Godsend. 

It  is  possible  that  rents  in  certain  localities  near  the  Brooklyn 
Bridge  may  go  up  somewhat.  But  with  the  certainty  that  new  and 
better  accommodations,  for  even  less  rents,  can  then  be  had  by  riding  ten 
minutes  further  out  on  the  elevated  roads,  where  now  are  vacant  lots ;  and 
that  thousands  upon  thousands  of  mechanics  will  be  thereby  given 
steady  employment.  Who,  under  such  circumstances,  would  not  be  glad 
to  have  these  rents  near  the  bridge  go  up?  even  if  they  doubled  in 
price,  a  thing  utterly  impossible. 

V. 

PER  CAPITA  COST  OF  THE  CITIES. 

The  fact  that  the  per  capita  cost  of  the  Brooklyn  city  government 
may  be  less  than  the  per  capita  cost  of  the  New  York  city  government, 
and  the  cost  of  running  the  Brooklyn  fire  and  police  departments  less 
per  head  of  Brooklyn  population  than  the  cost  of  New  York  fire  and 
police  departments  is  per  head  of  New  York  population,  which  the 
opponents  of  consolidation  so  dearly  love  to  use  as  arguments  against 
it,  have  really  nothing  to  do  with  the  case.  There  is  no  such  thing  as 
a  per  capita  tax  to  support  either  city  government;  therefore,  the  per 
capita  cost  of  running  that  city  government  is  not  relevant,  or  at  least 
only  remotely  so. 

Let  us,  however,  for  argument's  sake  suppose  a  case.  Suppose 
that  half  of  the  population  of  New  York  city  should  some  fine  day  sud- 
denly take  it  into  their  heads  to  move  over  to  Brooklyn.  The  per 
capita  cost  of  governing  the  remaining  population  of  New  York  would 
immediately  be  doubled  in  consequence,  and  the  per  capita  cost  of 
governing  Brooklyn  would  immediately  become  less  than  half  what  it 
now  is;  but  the  taxes  in  Brooklyn  would  jump  up  amazingly,  because 
while  the  people  (per  capita)  had  moved  to  Brooklyn,  the  taxable  prop- 
erty remained  in  New  York. 


14 


Suppose  further,  for  argument's  sake,  that  the  other  half  of  New 
York's  population  should  then  take  it  into  their  heads  to  also  move  over 
to  Brooklyn,  leaving  nobody  as  residents  behind  them  but  the  watch- 
men, janitors  and  keepers  employed  to  look  after  the  property,  the  per 
capita  cost  of  governing  New  York  would  then  be  towards  ten  thousand 
dollars  per  head  of  its  population,  but  for  the  very  same  reason  New 
York  taxes  would  be  almost  nothing,  while  Brooklyn  per  capita  cost 
would  be  almost  nothing,  but  its  taxes  would  be  frightful.  In  fact,  it 
would  not  be  taxation,  but  confiscation.  Brooklyn  would  have  the 
people  but  not  the  property,  and  New  York  the  property  but  not  the 
people.  New  York  and  Brooklyn  taxes  and  per  capita  cost  are  then 
in  the  two  opposite  scales  of  a  pair  of  balances — as  one  goes  up  the 
other  comes  down.  If  per  capita  cost  is  low,  taxes  are  high  and  vice 
versa.  You  may  say  that  I  have  drawn  an  extreme  picture.  Not  so, 
for  except  the  tenement  houses  east  of  the  Bowery,  there  are  very  few 
residents  now  in  New  York  below  4th  Street,  but  the  janitors,  watch- 
men and  keepers  of  the  property  and  taxable  wealth  stored  there. 
These  people  are  moving  away,  crowded  out  by  business,  and  as  they 
move  to  Brooklyn  its  taxes  go  up  and  per  capita  cost  comes  down. 

The  per  capita  argument  then  so  far  as  it  is  relevant,  instead  of 
being  an  argument  against  consolidation,  when  closely  examined  is  an 
argument  in  favor  of  it.  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  Brooklyn 
taxes  mount  higher  and  higher  each  year  and  New  York  taxes  as 
steadily  grow  lower.  And,  further,  that  this  state  of  affairs  is  bound  to 
continue  so  long  as  the  two  cities  remain  separate,  notwithstanding 
honest  government  of  both  cities,  for  the  reasons  given  in  the  other 
pamphlet  which  will  not  be  repeated  here. 

VI. 

BENEFIT  TO  NEW  YORK. 

That  New  York  will  be  greatly  benefited  from  annexation  of 
Brooklyn,  by  reason  of  New  York's  aggrandizement  being  placed  in 
one  instant  in  the  proud  position  of  second  city  in  size  in  the  world,  is 
conceded.  The  consolidated  city  will  at  once  have  a  population 
500,000  greater  than  Paris,  and  be  three-quarters  as  large  as  London; 
for  we  will  have,  by  the  act  of  consolidation,  a  population  exceeding 
3,000,000,  and  that,  too,  without  the  annexation  of  far  distant  suburbs, 
a  process  that  we  ridicule  in  western  cities,  but  by  the  simple  process 
of  welding  New  York,  Kings  County  and  Long  Island  City  into  one 


15 


city,  even  if  no  other  territory  should  be  included.  And,  furthermore, 
create  a  city  so  large  that  no  Bing  or  Hall  can  possibly  control  it. 
Therefore,  the  natural  tendencies  of  the  consolidated  city  will  be  towards 
good  government. 

Now  comes  a  new  feature  in  the  consolidation  movement,  a  feature 
never  before  contemplated,  because  until  recently  it  did  not  exist ;  but 
which  now  exists  and  is  destined  to  play  an  important  part  in  the  con- 
solidation movement,  viz.,  the  wonderfully  rapid  growth  of  Chicago, 
the  danger  of  its  shortly  passing  New  York  and  becoming  the  first 
city  in  the  land,  compelling  New  York  to  play  second  to  Chicago  for- 
ever after  in  everything,  no  matter  what — business,  music,  society, 
politics,  the  drama,  everything.  Much  against  the  New  Yorker's  will, 
he  is  obliged  to  admit  that  Chicago  is  growing  very  much  faster  than 
New  York,  and  in  fact  it  is  destined  to  overtake  New  York  in  from 
three  to  five  years.  But  it  is  not  growing  so  fast  as  New  York  and 
Brooklyn  together.  This  young  city  on  the  shores  of  Lake  Michigan, 
like  a  great  overgrown  boy,  as  big  at  the  age  of  16  as  his  father,  and 
still  growing,  you  may  sneer  at  all  you  like,  but  it  is  there  every  time, 
and  with  a  capacity  for  getting  there  wholly  unknown  here  in  the  east. 
A  hard  working  youngster  who  is  never  idle,  who  perhaps  lacks  finish 
and  polish,  but  who  does  not  lack  public  spirit  and  vehement  energy 
in  everything  it  undertakes,  in  which  spirit  New  York  is  sadly  lacking. 
Covered  with  soot  and  dirt,  ragged  and  very,  very  "sassy,"  its  wonder- 
ful growth  is  not  only  a  standing  menace  to  New  York's  pride  and 
prosperity  as  the  metropolis  of  America,  but  its  growth  upon  growth 
has  caused  the  Chicago  menace  to  become  an  imminent  danger  so  near, 
so  great  as  to  be  startling.  A  danger  not  distant,  not  far  off  in  years, 
but  here  now  at  hand.  Just  as  certain  as  that  New  York  is  on  Man- 
hattan Island,  just  so  certain  will  Chicago  pass  New  York  and  become 
chief  city  of  the  United  States,  the  metropolis  of  America  within  five 
years,  without  New  York  annexes  Brooklyn.  No  price  is  too  great  for 
New  York  to  pay  rather  than  lose  its  commercial  prestige  and  standing 
as  chief  city  of  America;  $50,000,000  per  year  would  be  a  small 
amount  for  New  York  to  pay  to  save  itself  from  such  humiliation  and 
loss  of  business.  And  when  you  consider  that  the  total  taxation  of 
Brooklyn  is  only  a  little  over  $12,000,000  annually,  New  York  might 
far  better  pay  it  all  and  guarantee  to  us  in  Brooklyn  exemption  from 
all  taxation  of  every  kind  for  one  hundred  years  to  come  rather  than 
lose  its  prestige. 


16 


Imagine  for  one  moment  New  York  second  to  Chicago  in  every- 
thing it  did,  the  sneers,  taunts,  gibes  and  insults  that  the  New  Yorkers 
now  have  to  submit  to  from  this  Chicago  would  be  multiplied  a  thou- 
sand-fold, and  New  York  would  be  told  of  it,  jeered  at,  twitted  of  it  and 
taunted  with  it  by  Chicago  every  hour  in  the  day,  to  say  nothing  of 
loss  of  business  that  always  follows  loss  of  prestige.  New  York  lost  the 
World's  Fair,  which  is  but  a  drop  in  the  bucket  compared  to  the  loss 
which  it  will  sustain  if  Chicago  takes  New  York's  place  as  chief  city 
of  America. 

To  show  you  how  close  Chicago  is  on  to  New  York  and  what  great 
benefit  the  World's  Fair  of  1893  has  been  to  that  city  in  matter  of  popu- 
lation, look  at  the  total  vote  that  Chicago  polled  for  its  Mayor  at  a  special 
election  on  the  19th  of  last  December  (1893),  when  each  side  was  cutting 
down  the  vote  of  the  other  side  to  the  lowest  possible  degree,  then  com- 
pare it  with  New  York's  total  vote  of  one  month  before.  As  there  has 
been  no  general  census  of  both  cities  since  1890  you  will  have  to  judge 
by  their  total  vote,  always  considered  a  fair  criterion.  The  following 
are  the  official  figures,  the  New  York  vote  being  the  one  declared  for 
Common  Pleas  Judge: 

1893,  New  York  total  vote,       -       -  238,157 
"     Chicago       "      "     -       -       -  227,350 
Difference  only        -  10,807 
At  the  same  election  Chicago  registered  282,040  votes,  or  16,193 
more  votes  than  New  York  did 

Note. — This  difference  of  only  10,807  between  the  total  vote  of  New  York  and  the 
total  vote  of  Chicago,  at  the  usual  general  average  of  one  vote  to  every  seven  of  population, 
indicates  that  this  year,  (1894),  Chicago's  population  is  only  75,649  behind  New  York. 

There  is  but  one  avenue  of  escape  for  New  York  from  the  impend- 
ing calamity  that  surely  awaits  it.  And  that  avenue  happily  offers 
not  temporary  escape,  but  permanent  for  all  time  to  come,  as  you  will 
see  by  the  table  on  page  30  of  this  pamphlet,  viz.,  consolidation  with 
Brooklyn. 

Have  you  ever  stopped  to  think  what  the  loss  of  New  York's 
position  as  chief  city  of  America  would  amount  to  ?  What  its  effect  on 
both  New  York  and  Brooklyn  would  be  and  ivhy  it  would  prove  disas- 
trous? No!  Well,  then  let  us  for  a  moment  examine  into  this  matter, 
and  to  do  this  intelligently  we  must  first  understand  why  it  is  that 
being  chief  city  of  a  nation  is  so  very  important  to  that  city. 


17 


In  every  nation  on  the  faee  of  the  earth  is  some  one  city  which, 
being  very  much  larger  than  any  other  city  in  that  nation,  is  not  only 
accorded  by  all  other  nations  the  fame  and  prestige  of  being  chief  city 
of  that  nation,  but  is  looked  up  to  all  over  the  world  as  the  leader,  and 
its  markets  and  prices  quoted  as  the  ruling  markets  and  prices  govern- 
ing trade  in  that  nation,  hence  the  name  Metropolis  (Mother  city.)  In 
England  it  is  London ;  in  Germany  it  is  Berlin ;  in  Franco.  Paris ;  in  Hol- 
land, Amsterdam;  and  in  the  United  States  it  is  at  the  present  time  New 
York.  This  chieftainship  over  all  other  cities  in  a  nation  brings  to  that 
city  all  of  the  business  of  a  metropolitan  nature,  which  of  a  necessity 
must  be  located  in  the  chief  city  of  that  nation,  generally  a  wholesale 
banking  business,  or  banking  for  other  banks  and  trust  companies  of  that 
nation,  and  the  importing  and  exporting  agencies  of  such  foreign  business 
houses  of  all  kinds,  as  have  but  one  agency  or  but  one  general  agency 
in  that  particular  nation,  which  agency  must  necessarily  be  located  in 
the  chief  city  of  that  nation.  All  of  that  class  of  strictly  metropolitan 
business  in  this  country  is  now  located  in  New  York,  and  it  is  the  life, 
the  main-stay  and  the  support  of  New  York.  Following  it  and  located 
near  it  are  the  thousand  and  one  other  and  smaller  concerns,  which  manu- 
facture for  or  sell  to  the  metropolitan  trade  and  are  dependent  upon  it, 
and,  which  being  deprived  of  that  trade  by  reason  of  its  going  to  another 
city,  either  go  with  it  or  losing  their  chief  support,  struggle  along  for 
awhile,  languish  and  fail.  ...  It  is  a  very  low  estimate  to  say  that  this 
class  of  metropolitan  business  with  its  following,  is  worth  to  the  cities 
of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  to-day  not  less  than  one  thousand  million  dol- 
lars per  annum.  That  New  York's  prestige  as  chief  city,  the  metropolis 
of  America,  is  now,  for  the  first  time,  seriously  threatened  by  Chicago, 
no  one  can  safely  deny.  If  New  York  should  for  any  reason  fail  to  con- 
solidate with  Brooklyn  it  would  be  the  beginning  of  its  downfall,  for  as 
it  then  will  no  longer  be  the  metropolis  of  America,  its  metropolitan 
business  must  of  a  necessity  go  to  the  city  that  is.  The  change  would 
not  be  sudden,  but  very  gradual.  Foreign  banks  and  business  houses, 
before  taking  their  American  banks  and  business  houses  away  from  New 
York,  would  wait  until  they  were  absolutely  certain  that  New  York 
was  no  longer  chief  city  of  America,  then  one  by  one  those  houses  would, 

"Fold  their  teats,  like  the  Arabs,  and  as  silently  steal  away." 

The  seats  in  its  public  exchanges  would  gradually  become  of  less  and 
less  value,  its  great  marts  of  trade  would  one  by  one  close  their  doors, 
dry  rot  would  set  in  and  like  "  Great  Ca?sar,  it  falls."  from  its  high  estate 


18 


as  the  greatest  of  American  cities  and  will  then  slowly  sink  into  the 
oblivion  of  second  and  third  place. 

Take  the  case  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia:  Up  to  about  the  year 
1803  Philadelphia  was  chief  city,  the  metropolis  of  America,  having  all 
of  the  metropolitan  trade  above  described. 

It  was  admitted  on  all  sides  that  Philadelphia  was  not  only  the 
greatest  city  of  America,  but  that  its  situation  and  its  great  wealth  were 
such  that  it  necessarily  would  continue  to  be  chief  city,  growing  as  the 
country  grew,  expanding  as  the  nation  expanded.  It  had  not  only  the 
wealth,  but  the  business,  the  manufactures,  the  trades,  the  brains,  the 
society  of  this  country.  Its  position  was  apparently  so  secure  as  to  be 
impregnable.  William  Cullen  Bryant's  History  of  the  United  States, 
Vol.  4,  page  91,  says: 

"At  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary  War,  (1783),  Philadelphia  was  chief 
city  of  this  country,  its  population  of  forty  thousand  being  double  that  of  Bos- 
ton, and  three  times  that  of  New  York.  In  a  parade  of  Philadelphia  tradesmen 
and  mechanics  fifty  distinct  trades  were  represented  in  the  procession.  It  was 
built  upon  a  solid  foundation  of  manufactures  and  trade.  New  York  was 
paralyzed  from  occupation  of  the  British  and  from  ravages  of  fire." 

But  New  York  began  creeping  up  and  passed  Philadelphia  some 
time  about  the  year  1803.  The  primary  cause  of  Philadelphia's  loss 
of  position  was  undoubtedly  the  determination  of  Congress  to  remove 
from  Philadelphia,  which  it  did,  going  to  Washington  some  fifteen  years 
later.  But  whatever  the  cause,  the  result  is  the  same — New  York  got 
ahead  and  began  to  draw  Philadelphia's  metropolitan  business  away. 
It  absorbed  it  more  and  more  each  year,  as  foreign  banks  and  busi- 
ness houses  became  assured  that  New  York's  position  as  chief  city  of 
America  was  secure;  until  finally  New  York  took  it  all,  still  has  it,  and 
will  keep  it  for  all  time  to  come  on  one  condition,  viz.,  that  it  consoli- 
dates with  Brooklyn,  not  otherwise,  for  it  is  self-evident  that  it  cannot 
continue  to  have  this  metropolitan  business  and  not  be  the  metropolis. 
New  Y^ork  can't  afford  to  voluntarily  surrender  its  high  position  as 
chief  city  of  America  and  meekly  take  second  place,  with  the  avenue 
of  escape  so  close  at  hand;  because,  forsooth,  it  might  cost  a  few  pen- 
nies to  avail  itself  of  that  avenue  of  escape,  —  consolidation  with 
Brooklyn. 

When  New  York  ceases  to  be  first  city  in  the  land  it  ceases  to  be 
of  importance,  it  ceases  to  be  New  Yrork.  The  loss  of  business  that 
such  calamity  would  entail  on  New  Y^ork  would  simply  be  frightful. 


19 


Following  that  loss  would  of  course  come  the  great  shrinkage  in  real 
estate  values  j  thousands  of  workmen  and  rent-payers  would  be  thrown 
out  of  employment,  and  they  and  their  families  compelled  to  move  to 
cheaper  quarters  to  save  rent,  if  indeed  they  were  able  to  pay  any  rent. 
Hundreds  of  stores  and  houses  would  in  time  become  tenantless  that 
never  were  so  before.  And  then  as  New  York  real  estate  decreased  in 
value,  the  tax  rate  upon  it  would  of  course  be  increased,  in  order  to 
collect  the  same  gross  amount  of  taxes  from  it.  So  that  whatever  the 
cost  to  New  York  of  consolidating  Brooklyn  with  itself  may  be,  it  will 
cost  New  York  tex  times  as  much  if  it  don't  do  it.  New  York  is  not 
now  in  the  position  to  dictate  terms  or  quibble  about  price.  Quite  the 
contrary  for  its  continued  supremacy,  it  is  wholly  dependant  upon 
annexation  of  Brooklyn. 

If  you  will  examine  the  statistics  you  will  see  that  while  the  census 
shows  that  from  1880  to  1890,  considering  the  aggregate  population  of 
New  York,  Kings  County,  and  Long  Island  City;  Chicago,  notAvith- 
standing  its  wild  grab  for  population  by  annexation  of  far  distant  suburbs, 
gained  nothing  on  the  population  of  the  Greater  New  York,  but  actually 
fell  behind  (see  page  30  this  pamphlet)  over  200,000,  and  that,  too, 
without  allowing  the  consolidated  city  to  annex  any  of  the  suburbs 
that  now  cluster  around  the  Greater  New  York,  such  as  the  cities 
of  Jersey  City,  Hoboken,  Weehawken,  Newark,  Mt.  Vernon,  Yon- 
kers,  &c,  all  within  7  miles.  New  York,  that  is  the  New  York  on 
Manhattan  Island,  has  reached  the  point  where,  owing  to  lack  of  rapid 
transit  facilities,  its  growth  as  a  city  is  not  only  greatly  retarded,  but 
at  times  almost  at  a  standstill.  The  danger  that  Chicago  will  surpass 
New  York  is  not  only  then  greater  than  ever,  but  it  is  absolutely  certain 
to  occur  in  five  years,  and  some  say  within  three  years,  unless  New 
York  annexes  Brooklyn.  But  with  such  annexation  the  consolidated 
city  will  have  a  population  of  over  3,000,000  to  start  with,  and  growing 
very  much  faster  than  Chicago,  is  not  only  placed  forever  out  of  the 
power  of  any  other  city  to  overtake  it,  but  so  extremely  out  of  the 
power  and  so  very  far  ahead  of  every  other  city  that  none  will  ever 
again  make  the  effort  to  supersede  the  "Greater  New  York"  as  the 
Metropolis.  It  is  then  a  case  where  New  York  and  Brooklyn  must 
apply  to  themselves  the  well  known  motto  of  the  United  States, 


"UNITED  WE  STAND,  DIVIDED  WE  FALL." 


20 


VII. 

CHARACTER  OF  THE  CITIES. 

Brooklyn,  unlike  New  York,  is  a  city  of  small  homes,  the  taxes  on 
which  are  getting  to  be  unbearable.  New  York  on  the  other  hand  is 
an  aggregation  of  giant  corporations,  huge  buildings,  and  vast  landed 
estates,  the  taxes  on  which  are  so  low  as  not  to  be  noticed.  For  every 
large  building  put  up  in  Brooklyn,  New  Y'ork  erects  a  dozen,  each  of 
the  dozen  generally  worth  five  or  six  times  what  the  Brooklyn  one  is; 
the  New  York  building  being  also  very  quick  to  sell,  while  it  is  nearly 
impossible  to  sell  the  Brooklyn  building  even  at  cost  price,  asking  no 
profit.  It  is  said  that  twenty  men  and  corporations  pay  one-half  of 
New  York  taxes.  Not  so  with  Brooklyn:  we  have  no  Trinity  Church 
Estate,  no  Sailor  Snug  Harbor  Co.,  Rhinelander  or  Astor  Estates, 
Vanderbilt  or  New  York  Central  properties,  paying  taxes  on  over  one 
hundred  million  dollars  each  year  and  collecting  those  taxes  back  in 
their  rents,  largely  from  Brooklyn  people.  In  Brooklyn  it  takes 
20,000  people,  each  paying  on  $5,000  worth  of  property  to  pay  the 
taxes  on  $100,000,000,  which  any  one  of  a  dozen  great  landed  estates 
in  New  Y^ork  are  valued  at,  the  two  Astor  estates  alone  being  put 
down  by  experts  as  worth  $400,000,000.  And,  mark  you!  the  State 
Board  of  Tax  Assessors  certify  that  those  great  estates  are  assessed  for 
taxes  at  an  average  of  only  44J  per  cent,  of  their  actual  or  selling 
value,  and  on  that  they  are  taxed,  this  year  of  1894,  only  $1.82  per 
$100  of  property  taxed;  while  Brooklyn,  a  poor  man's  city,  a  city  of 
small  homes,  is  assessed  at  for  taxes  at  70  to  100  per  cent,  of  its  actual 
value,  and  on  that  taxed,  this  year  of  1894,  an  average  of  $2.85^- per 
$100  of  property  taxed;  thus  making  the  Brooklyn  property  pay  more 
than  three  times  as  much  in  taxes  as  the  New  York  property  per  $100 
of  its  actual  or  selling  value.  New  Yrork  also  owning  and  controlling 
all  of  our  ferries  and  water  front  franchises  as  shown  in  the  other 
pamphlet. 

Is  it  any  wonder  that  the  Brooklyn  man  complains?  Is  it  not  a 
greater  wonder  that  there  are  not  riots  and  bloodshed  in  the  streets  of 
both  New  Yrork  and  Brooklyn  as  the  result  of  such  an  outrageous  state 
of  affairs?  Consolidate  the  two  cities  and  equalize  both  the  tax  rates 
and  tax  valuations  and  you  see  for  yourself  that  it  will  necessarily 
reduce  Brooklyn  taxes  more  than  50  per  cent.,  while  creating  no 
perceptible  increase  in  New  York  taxes.  New  YTork  need  not,  therefore, 
fear  that  it  is  going  to  be  loaded  down  with  Brooklyn  taxes ;  for  while 


21 


New  York  can  well  afford  to  pay  all  of  Brooklyn  taxes  rather  than  lose 
its  prestige,  yet  we  in  Brooklyn  don't  ask  it.  The  $6,000,000  or 
thereabout  reduction  of  Brooklyn  taxes  that  consolidation  will  effect,  will 
not  be  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  increase  of  New  York  taxes. 
Nothing  of  the  kind!  All  that  we  ask  is  an  equalization  with  New 
York.  If,  perchance,  a  slight  increase  in  New  York  taxes  should  follow 
as  the  result  of  the  consolidation,  such  increase  at  the  most  would  be 
very  slight  and  would  not  last  over  three  years.  Figures  demonstrate 
this  beyond  question. 

VIII. 

BONDED  INDEBTEDNESS. 

By  Article  8,  Section  11,  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  amendment  of  1884,  the  indebtedness  of  any  city  in  this  State, 
having  a  population  over  100,000,  is  limited  to  ten  per  cent,  of  the 
assessed  value  of  the  real  estate  in  that  city,  taxable  personal  estate  not 
being  considered.  All  indebtedness  of  any  such  city  in  excess  of  ten  per 
centum  of  its  taxable  real  estate,  at  the  assessed  valuation  thereof  made 
last  previous  to  the  incurring  of  such  indebtedness,  the  Constitution  says 
"  shall  be  absolutely  void,"  except  revenue  bonds  issued  in  anticipation 
of  the  collection  of  taxes,  and  water  bonds  issued  to  procure  a  supply  of 
water  for  such  city,  which  are  not  included  in  the  ten  per  cent,  limit. 
Now  then!  By  the  annual  message  of  the  Mayors  of  New  York  and 
Brooklyn,  sent  to  the  respective  Common  Councils  on  January  1st,  1894, 
coupled  with  the  last  previous  report  of  the  tax  department  of  the  two 
cities,  the  following  appears,  viz. : 

On  January  1st,  1894,  New  York  had  taxable  real  estate  at 
assessed  valuations  aggregating  $1,562,582,393,  and  a  total  outstanding 
indebtedness  of  $100,762,407,  leaving  a  margin  between  its  total  in- 
debtedness and  its  constitutional  limit  of  exactly  $55,495,832.  And  on 
the  same  day  Brooklyn  had  taxable  real  estate  at  assessed  valuations 
aggregating  $486,531,505,  and  a  total  outstanding  indebtedness  of 
$47,337,499,  leaving  a  margin  of  only  $1,315,651,  before  reaching  its 
constitutional  limit. 

A  very  slight  margin,  you  will  say.  Aye,  so  slender  indeed,  that 
clerks,  teachers,  policemen,  firemen  and  other  employees  of  Brooklyn  are 
compelled  to  have  their  meagre  salaries  pared  down  and  fifty  dollars 
kept  back  from  this  man,  one  hundred  from  that  man,  and  their 
families  correspondingly  deprived  of  necessaries  in  order  that  the  great 


22 


city  of  Brooklyn  may  make  both  ends  meet  and,  if  possible,  avoid 
having  its  bonds  rejected  by  banks  and  other  owners  as  worthless  for 
having  exceeded  the  constitutional  limit.  Despite  which,  when  the 
obligations  that  the  city  has  assumed  for  the  purchase  of  the  Wallabout 
Market  lands,  the  improvement  of  Liberty  Street,  etc.,  are  considered, 
it  is  a  very  serious  question  whether  the  constitutional  limit  of  Brooklyn 
indebtedness  has  not  already  been  reached,  with  no  margin  whatever 
left. 

If  New  York  was  assessed  for  taxes  as  high  in  proportion  to  the 
selling  value  of  its  property  as  Brooklyn,  it  would  have  a  margin  of 
over  tivo  hundred  million  dollars  between  its  indebtedness  and  the  con- 
stitutional limit.  Mayor  Gilroy  of  New  York  goes  even  farther  than 
this.  In  an  article  published  over  his  signature  in  the  September,  1 893, 
number  of  the  u North  American  Review"  Mayor  Gilroy  says: 

aNew  York  is  probably  the  richest  community  on  earth;  there  is  no  other 
city  that  can  borrow  money  in  the  open  market  as  cheaply  as  New  York.  It  is 
because  we  are  richer  and  our  good  faith  unquestioned  and  unquestionable." 

And  in  the  October  number  of  the  same  magazine,  he  inserts  tables 
showing  that  New  York  City  in  addition  to  the  taxable  real  estate 
within  its  limits,  owns  in  its  own  right  available  assets  of  the  value  of 
five  hundred  and  fifty-nine  millions  of  dollars.  And  on  page  410  of 
the  same  magazine  he  says: 

u  New  York  has  ample  real  estate  security  to  offer  for  a  debt  four  times  the 
size  of  the  present  obligations,  or  four  hundred  million  dollars,  if  any  extraor- 
dinary combination  of  circumstances  should  make  it  necessary  to  incur  such  a 
debt." 

Following  this  up  in  the  November,  1893,  number  of  the  u  North 
American  Review"  Mayor  Gilroy  says: 

u  The  closest  estimate  of  the  actual  market  value  of  such  property  as  the 
New  York  tax  commission  have  been  able  to  find  on  which  to  lay  taxes,  is  five 
thousand  millions  of  dollars." 

And,  of  course,  the  ten  per  cent,  constitutional  limit  on  the  latter 
amount  would  be  five  hundred  millions  of  dollars,  or  thirteen  and  one- 
half  millions  more  than  the  total  assessed  real  estate  valuations  of  the 
entire  city  of  Brooklyn.  A  thing  almost  incredible,  viz.,  that  the  actual 
value  of  New  York  is  so  great  that  by  simply  increasing  its  assessed 
valuations  on  the  tax  books  up  to  the  actual  value  of  the  property 
taxed,  as  it  has  a  perfect  right  to  do,  and  is  done  in  many  instances  in 
Brooklyn  and  other  cities  of  this  country,  it  could  then  legally  incur  an 


23 


indebtedness  sufficient  to  buy  every  building,  every  vacant  lot,  every 
piece  of  real  estate  of  every  kind  until  there  was  in  all  Brooklyn,  as  it 
existed  January  1st,  1894,  not  one  inch  left  unpurchased — pay  for  it  all 
at  its  full  assessed  valuation,  and  have  thirteen  and  one-half  million 
dollars  left  before  exceeding  New  York's  constitutional  limit  of  in- 
debtedness. And  that  even  this  does  not  include  the  $559,000,000  of 
property  that  New  York  owns  in  its  own  right,  capable  of  being 
made  security  for  still  further  and  stupendous  sums  of  money:  Yet 
here  are  the  figures,  examine  them  yourselves  and  be  convinced 
that  such  is  the  case. 

On  page  543  of  the  same  magazine,  Mayor  Gilroy  in  speaking  of 
the  New  York  tax  department,  further  says: 

u  In  a  general  way  it  is  understood  that  the  assessment  made  by  the  Tax 
Board  is  fixed,  as  nearly  as  may  be,  at  40  per  cent,  of  the  real  or  market  value 
of  the  property  taxed." 

As  the  Mayor  of  New  York  speaks  officially  for  the  city,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  go  behind  his  figures  for  further  proofs. 

In  this  pamphlet,  as  in  the  other,  all  figures  and  quotations  given 
have  been  carefully  compared  with  the  official  reports  and  originals 
referred  to,  so  as  to  avoid  any  errors:  It  is  possible  that  annexation 
of  the  county  towns  of  Kings  County  to  Brooklyn  may  bring  in 
sufficient  additional  real  estate  to  enable  Brooklyn  to  issue  a  few  more 
bonds  and  so  stave  off  bankruptcy  for  a  while  longer;  but  not  to  any 
material  extent,  as  those  towns  are  loaded  down  with  debts  already. 

So  far  as  the  present  outstanding  indebtedness  of  the  two  cities  are 
concerned,  Brooklyn  does  not  ask  New  York  to  pay  one  penny  of  her 
former  bonds.  Each  city  will  pay  its  own  debts  outstanding  up  to  the 
time  that  consolidation  takes  effect.  Like  two  men  going  into  partner- 
ship with  each  other,  neither  one  pays  the  former  debts  of  the  other. 
The  probability  is  that  the  consolidated  city  will  issue  bonds  covering 
the  taxable  property  of  both  cities,  and  use  them  to  take  up  and  redeem 
the  outstanding  bonds  of  both  cities  in  such  proportions  of  each  as  will 
be  equitable  j  say,  for  every  one  million  dollars  of  Brooklyn's  bonds  and 
debts  thus  paid  off,  let  two  millions  of  New  York's  outstanding  debts  and 
bonds  be  paid,  or  whatever  other  amount  the  finance  department  of  the 
two  cities  should  find  and  certify  to  be  the  proper  and  exact  proportion 
between  the  two  cities.  In  that  way  Brooklyn  can  take  up  its  outstand- 
ing bonds,  paying  31  and  4  per  cent,  interest  with  bonds  of  the  consoli- 
dated city  issued  at  2 \  to  3  per  cent,  interest,  the  same  rate  that  New 


24 

York  now  pays,  with  no  possibility  of  running  against  the  constitutional 
limit,  for  at  the  start  there  would  be,  as  above  shown,  over  $55,000,000 
margin  under  the  constitutional  limit  of  the  consolidated  city,  with 
an  extreme  possible  limit  of  four  hundred  to  five  hundred  millions 
($500,000,000),  as  shown  by  Mayor  Gilroy  above  quoted.  The  present 
figures  also  showing  that  New  York  side  alone  increases  in  value 
of  its  taxable  property  from  one  hundred  to  one  hundred  and  forty 
million  dollars  per  year,  assessed  for  taxes  as  before  stated  at  only 
40  to  44^-  cents  on  the  dollar,  and  the  constitutional  limit,  therefore, 
even  at  that  low  rate  enlarges  and  increases  each  year  from  ten  to 
fourteen  millions  ($14,000,000.) 

IX. 

NEW  BRIDGES  AND  IMPROVEMENTS. 

The  great  expense  of  building  the  proposed  new  bridges  over  the 
East  River  is  such,  that  private  companies  organized  to  build  them 
cannot  show  probable  dividends  from  bridge  receipts  sufficient  to  make 
it  an  object  for  stockholders  to  invest  their  money  in  building  them — 
hence;  no  bridges:  New  York  City  does  not  want  the  bridges  unless 
the  cities  are  consolidated,  and  Brooklyn  City  is  so  close  to  the  consti- 
tutional limit  of  its  indebtedness,  that  it  could  not  safely  undertake  to 
build  a  single  bridge  pier.  But  one  course  remains — consolidate  the 
cities  and  let  the  bridges  be  built  by  the  consolidated  city  and  made 
passage  free,  the  same  as  any  other  street  or  highway  in  the  same  city. 
And  what  is  true  of  the  new  bridges,  is  also  true  of  other  much  needed 
Brooklyn  improvements;  its  rough  cobble  stone  streets,  its  wretched 
sewers  and  miserable  waterworks  can  only  be  improved  by  the  outlay 
of  vast  sums  of  money,  which  it  cannot  get  because  the  city  has  about 
reached  its  debt  limit. 

Inadequate  fire  department  apparatus  causes  immense  confla- 
grations, and  no  money  can  be  had  to  buy  first  class  machinery  and 
modern  appliances.  No  person  will  trust  the  city  when  there  is  great 
danger  that  the  debt  may  be  declared  void. 

As  the  situation  is  to-day,  every  time  that  the  city  issues  a  new  lot 
of  bonds  for  money  to  pay  for  absolute  necessaries,  it  must,  like  a  servant 
girl  looking  for  a  situation,  take  its  certificate  of  good  character  along, 
(from  the  courts,)  so  as  to  prove  that  the  bonds  are  not  void  for  having 
exceeded  the  ten  per  cent,  debt  limit.    And  if,  perchance,  buyers  are 


25 


found  without  the  city  being  sent  back  to  the  courts  for  a  new  certificate 
of  good  character,  Brooklyn  public  officials  clap  their  hands  in  high 
glee  at  the  discovery  that  the  city's  credit  is  still  good. 

But  when  the  cities  are  consolidated  all  this  will  be  changed,  when 
Brooklyn  is  part  and  parcel  of  the  Greater  New  York,  so  that  it  has  the 
unlimited  New  York  credit  described  by  Mayor  Gilroy  in  the  last 
chapter,  more  Brooklyn  streets  will  be  well  paved  and  properly  sewered 
in  one  year  than  will  otherwise  be  done  in  ten  years.  And  in  five  years 
time,  the  arches  of  at  least  three  new  bridges  will  be  seen  spanning  the 
East  River,  which  it  is  now  evident  will  not  be  seen  until  then. 

Are  not  the  thousands  of  working  men  who  will  build  those  bridges, 
pave  those  streets,  lay  those  sewers,  and  the  countless  other  thousands 
of  working  men  who  will  build  the  stores,  houses  and  flats  then  made 
saleable  and  rentable  along  the  lines  of  those  bridges  and  streets,  the 
persons  most  deeply  interested  in  consolidation  of  the  cities? 

X. 

WATER  SUPPLY. 
(a  suggestion.) 

The  scant  supply  of  water  in  Brooklyn,  each  year  growing  less 
and  less,  not  only  threatens  the  city  with  loss  of  health  and  possible 
pestilence  spreading  to  New  York,  but  sooner  or  later  with  a  terrible 
conflagration  which  may  lay  half  the  city  in  ashes  from  simple  lack  of 
water  to  put  out  the  fire.  The  present  supply  is  obtained  by  pumping 
from  small  lakes,  creeks  and  ponds  on  Long  Island  into  reservoirs 
leading  to  the  city  street  mains  and  pipes.  Any  attempt  to  extend  this 
pumping  process  is  but  a  make-shift  soon  exhausted:  Why?  Because 
it  is  known  that  there  is  not  fresh  water  enough  on  all  Long  Island  to 
supply  two  million  people ;  and  the  little  lakes,  ponds  and  creeks  not 
yet  engaged  in  supplying  the  Brooklyn  Water  Works  are  already 
depended  on,  and  in  many  cases  pre-empted  by  some  one  or  more  of 
the  scores  of  villages  and  Long  Island  Towns  scattered  along  their 
lines.  You  cannot  rob  those  villages  and  towns  of  their  water  supply. 
What  then  can  be  done?  Let  us  see!  New  York  has  just  completed 
an  aqueduct  31  miles  long,  which  its  engineers  and  the  aqueduct 
commissioners  in  their  report  state  cost,  including  all  dams,  approaches, 
feeders,  &c,  $28,576,775.10,  up  to  May  31st,  1894,  and  which  they 
certify  is  alone  capable  of  supplying  300,000,000  gallons  of  water  per 
day;  in  addition  to  which  the  former  Croton  system  still  supplies 
80,000,000  gallons  per  day  and  the  Bronx  River  system  20,000,000 


26 


gallons,  making  a  total  of  400,000,000  per  day,  which  allowing  one 
hundred  gallons  per  day  to  each  inhabitant,  man,  woman,  child  or  babe 
in  arms,  will  supply  four  million  people  with  all  of  the  water  that  they 
can  use-,  or  one  million  more  people  than  there  are  in  both  New  York 
and  Brooklyn. 

By  connecting  the  New  York  and  Brooklyn  water  systems  with 
pipes  laid  across  the  East  River  at  several  crossings,  probably  on  the 
river  bottom  anchored  and  protected  in  the  usual  manner,  an  abundance 
of  water  can  be  immediately  obtained.  And  while  it  is  true  that  in 
very  dry  weather  the  present  New  Y'ork  supply  may  not  be  sufficient 
to  fill  the  aqueduct  to  its  carrying  capacity,  yet  in  ordinary  weather  it 
is  capable  of  temporarily  supplying  both  New  YTork  and  Brooklyn, 
while  Brooklyn  would  still  have  its  present  system  and  pumping 
process,  only  calling  on  New  York  for  deficiency  or  in  case  of  accident. 

To  thus  hitch  the  Brooklyn  water  supply  system  unto  the  New 
Y  ork  system  as  one  of  the  results  of  Consolidation  of  the  cities,  would 
give  immediate  relief  to  Brooklyn  without  endangering  New  York. 
Then,  by  uniting  with  that  city  in  extending  the  aqueduct  to  the 
Housatonic  River,  Lake  George  or  Champlain,  an  inexhaustible  supply 
of  pure  water  for  both  cities  could  be  obtained,  each  side  paying  only 
its  proper  portion  of  the  expense,  and  many  millions  of  dollars  be  thus 
saved  to  the  tax-payers  of  both  cities. 

XI. 

PRIDE  OF  LIVING  IX  NEW  YORK  A  FACTOR. 

You  may  tell  the  New  Y'orker  it  is  only  his  pride  of  living  in  New 
York  that  makes  him  pay  $200  per  month  for  a  stuffy  flat  an  hour's 
ride  uptown  from  City  Hall,  when  he  can  get  a  brown-stone  front  on  a 
nice  street  in  Brooklyn,  but  a  half  hour's  ride  from  the  same  City  Hall, 
for  $75  per  month,  or  buy  it  at  the  rate  of  $100  per  month ;  or,  if  he 
desires  to  save  money,  can  get  a  smaller  brick  or  stone-front  house  having 
all  modern  conveniences,  and  on  a  good  street,  for  $25  to  $30  a  month 
rent,  or  buy  it  for  $4,000  or  $5,000.  And  in  the  outskirts  of  Brooklyn 
can  buy  a  wooden  house  for  even  $2,000  to  $3,500.  He  will  probably 
deny  your  assertion;  but  that  does  not  alter  the  fact,  it  is  his  pride. 
And  in  one  sense  it  is  a  justifiable  pride.  All  over  the  world,  wherever 
it  is  known  that  such  a  country  as  America  exists,  there  it  is  known 
also  that  America  has  one  great  city  so  situated  with  its  neighboring  city 
of  Brooklyn,  that  by  the  simple  process  of  the  consolidation  of  the  two, 


27 


will  make  it  the  greatest  city  in  the  world  before  another  generation 
passes,  and  that  that  city  is  named  New  York.  Every  American  takes 
a  pride  in  the  fact  and  calls  it  all  New  York.  Three  thousand  miles 
away  you  will  find  Americans  boasting  of  what  our  New  York  is  and 
what  is  going  to  be.  And  this  very  fact,  his  pride  that  New  York  is 
known  all  over  the  world  as  the  largest,  the  richest,  the  most  powerful 
and  influential  city  of  America,  holds  the  New  Yorker  a  resident  in  that 
city  when  he  knows  that  he  can  get  better  accommodations  for  one- 
quarter  the  money  in  Brooklyn.  Pride  is  one  of  the  strongest  of  all 
human  motives,  so  strong  indeed,  that  it  has  starved  many  a  man  and 
woman  to  death  rather  than  make  their  wants  known.  What's  the  use 
of  ignoring  it?  It's  an  element  in  the  case, — bank  on  it  and  use  it. 
I  make  the  bold  assertion  that  the  pride  of  living  in  New  York  controls 
and  fixes  the  price  of  every  foot  of  residence  property  on  Manhattan 
Island.  If  it  were  not  so,  Brooklyn  residence  property,  easier  of  access 
and  in  as  good  a  location,  would  be  just  as  valuable  as  New  York 
residence  property;  while  we  all  know  that  it  has  not  one-quarter  the 
value  of  New  York  property,  simply  because  it  is  not  New  York. 

Pride  of  living  in  New  York  and  in  the  best  part  of  New  York, 
caused  a  vacant  lot  on  Fifth  Avenue,  50  X 125  feet,  to  sell  for  $540,000; 
while  a  lot  of  the.  same  size  in  the  best  part  of  Brooklyn  brought  but 
$18,400,  and  all  of  the  talk  and  ridicule  of  the  world  does  not  affect  it. 

Note. — In  May,  1891,  a  vacant  lot  50x125" feet  on  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York,  S.  E. 
corner  of  55th  Street,  was  sold  by  Mrs.  Hammersly,  known  as  the  Duchess  of  Marlborough, 
to  W.  J.  Astor,  Jr.  for  $540,000.  The  same  week  a  lot  the  same  size  in  best  part  of  Brooklyn 
Heights  sold  for  $18,400.  See  Real  Estate  Record  of  that  date.  Since  which  time  New 
York  residence  property  has  increased  in  value  and  Brooklyn  residence  property  has  de- 
creased in  value. 

It  was  pride  that  made  this  great  difference  in  the  value  of  the 
two  lots  of  land,  for  the  Brooklyn  Heights  property  is  even  more  eligibly 
situated,  nearer  to  business,  easier  of  access,  surrounded  by  just  as  good 
a  class  of  residences  as  the  New  York  lot  and  having  no  objectionable 
features  near  at  hand.  u  Pride,"  in  this  particular  case,  upon  a  lot 
50x125  feet  was  then  of  the  exact  marketable  value  of  $521,600 — 
the  fortune  of  a  lifetime.  To  consolidate  Brooklyn  with  New  York 
under  the  name  of  New  York,  is  to  extend  that  pride  to  Brooklyn,  and 
have  it  influence  and  enhance  the  value  of  Brooklyn  property  as  well, 
and  that  without  injury  to  New  York.  Here,  again,  is  where  the 
workingman  and  mechanic  will  be  most  benefited  by  consolidation  of  the 
cities:  because  with  the  increased  values  of  Brooklyn  property  caused 


28 


by  a  greater  demand  for  New  York  houses  and  lots  in  Brooklyn,  will 
of  course  come  a  building  boom  to  supply  that  demand.  That  building 
boom  will  necessitate  the  employment  of  thousands  of  mechanics.  It 
can't  be  otherwise.  Where  now  a  dozen  mechanics  are  employed  in  the 
building  trades,  then  there  will  be  a  thousand,  and  where  now  a  thousand 
are  at  work,  then  there  will  be  twenty  thousand.  And  this  will  benefit 
New  York  as  well  as  Brooklyn,  because  it  will  increase  the  taxable 
property  of  the  city. 

If  the  New  Yorker  now  has  reason  to  be  proud  of  New  York  as 
chief  city  of  Amercia,  he  will  then  have  greater  reason  to  be  proud  of 
it  as  second  city  in  size  in  the  world,  having  certainty  that  in  the  near 
future  it  will  be  chief  city  of  the  world,  as  it  is  now  of  America.  The 
equalization  of  values  between  New  York  and  Brooklyn  property  will 
therefore  not  be  by  the  shrinkage  of  New  York  values,  but  by  the 
permanent  rise  in  Brooklyn  values.  The  owner  of  Brooklyn  vacant 
property,  in  order  to  obtain  benefit  of  his  rise  in  values,  must  then 
either  build  upon  it  or  sell  out  to  some  one  who  will  j  otherwise  the  more 
money  the  vacant  property  becomes  worth,  the  more  money  the  owner 
is  losing  every  day  by  holding  it  idle.  The  $540,000  vacant  lot  on 
Fifth  Avenue,  New  York,  is  money  lost  to  its  owner  unless  he  sets  at 
work  hundreds  of  mechanics  and  workingmen  building  a  mansion  upon 
it  in  keeping  with  the  price  of  the  lot  and  its  surroundings.  This  rise 
in  Brooklyn  real  estate,  by  reason  of  its  becoming  part  of  New  York, 
will  then  of  a  necessity  give  employment  for  several  years  to  countless 
thousands  of  poor  people,  mechanics  and  workmen  who  are  not  now 
employed,  in  building  upon  and  improving  Brooklyn  property;  other- 
wise the  owners  will  never  get  any  benefit  of  the  rise  in  values,  and  it 
would  soon  cease  to  exist.  With  the  completion  of  those  new  buildings 
the  working  people,  rent-payers  and  others  will  be  enabled  to  get  better 
quarters,  better  homes  at  cheaper  rents,  in  the  new  flats,  tenements 
and  houses  built  on  vacant  property  now  held  down  and  kept  idle  by  its 
present  excessive  taxation  and  by  the  fear  of  still  more  enormous 
future  taxes.  Keduce  those  taxes  one-half  by  consolidation  of  the 
cities,  with  no  need  to  fear  excessive  future  taxation,  and  every  foot  of 
that  property  is  immediately  worth  improving.  The  $10  or  $20  per 
month  rent  which  will  now  not  pay  the  taxes  on  a  property,  will  then  not 
only  pay  the  taxes  but  interest  on  the  money  invested  also,  and  of  course 
the  owner  can  afford  to  improve  it.  If,  as  has  often  been  stated, 
there  is  danger  of  too  much  building  then  being  done  in  Brooklyn,  it 


29 


wculd  only  make  rents  come  down  and  the  poor  man,  the  mechanic,  the 
laborer,  and  the  building  material  man,  having  received  their  pay  for 
the  buildings,  have  no  cause  to  worry.  Turn  this  question  which  way 
you  will,  look  at  it  on  all  sides  and  in  every  light,  the  fact  becomes 
more  and  more  apparent  and  undeniable  that  the  class  of  people  who 
will  receive  the  greatest  and  most  immediate  benefit  from  consolidation 
of  the  cities  are  the  workingmen  and  ivorldngivomen,  the  mechanics  and 
laborers  and  rent-payers  of  both  cities  together,  with  the  people  who  are 
dependent  upon  them. 

To  the  New  Yorker,  Lnen,  consoliaation  of  the  cities  means  the  sal- 
vation of  all  that  he  holds  dear,  his  pride  in  New  York  as  greatest  city 
of  America,  together  with  the  salvation  of  all  of  the  metropolitan  trade 
and  business  now  in  New  York  because  it  is  the  metropolis,  the  loss  of 
which  would  mean  ruin  to  New  York  and  excessive  taxation  of  its  real 
estate  as  before  described.  To  the  Brooklynite  it  means  reduction  of 
taxes  from  50  per  cent,  upwards,  whereby  the  terrible  blight,  the  curse 
of  Brooklyn's  excessive  taxation,  will  be  forever  removed.  And  to  the 
workingmen,  mechanics,  laborers,  building  material  men  of  both  cities, 
together  with  those  engaged  in  trading  with  and  selling  to  them,  it 
means  a  degree  of  prosperity  and  permanent  employment  that  they 
have  never  before  enjoyed. 

Then  let  one  and  all,  whether  residing  in  New  York  or  Brooklyn, 
on  next  election  day  make  sure  to  vote  the  ballot  which  reads: 


For  Consolidation. 


Respectfully  yours, 

Edward  C.  G-raves, 

234-235  Broadway, 

New  York. 

Brooklyn,  July  2d,  1894. 

(FOR  TABLE  REFERRED  TO  SEE  NEXT  PAGE.) 


30 


TABLE. 

(Referred  to  on  pages  16  and  10.) 

Showing  the  comparative  growth  of  the  consolidated  city  of  New 
York  and  of  the  city  of  Chicago,  including  all  of  the  latter's  annexations 
during  the  period  of  ten  years,  from  1880  to  1890,  taken  from  census, 
reports  of  those  years. 

Chicago  population,  1890,  -  -  -  1,099,850 

1880,    -  503,185 


Chicago  gain  in  ten  years,      -  -  596,665 
Consolidated  City  of  New  York : 

New  York  population,  1890,  (October  census,)  -  1,710,715 

Kings  County    "           "          "         "  -  892,058 

Long  Island  City u           "      -           -  -           -  30,5t)6 

Total,  1890,              -          -  -  2,633,279 
The  same  territory  in  1880: 

New  York  population,  1880,           -  -           -  1,206,577 

Kings  Coimty  599,549 

Long  Island  City  "           "               -  17,096 


Total,  1880,  -  1,823,222 

Deduct  population  of  1880  from  that  of  1890  shows 
that  consolidated  New  York  without  annexations 
gains  in  ten  years,  -  -  -  -810,057 

Deduct  from  it  Chicago's  gain  in  ten  years,  including 

all  annexations,         -  596,665 


Chicago  in  10  years  falls  behind,  -  -  213,392 

Note. — To  the  total  population  of  Chicago  in  1890  must  now  be  added,  not  only  its 
natural  growth  since  then,  but  the  immense  influx  of  population  caused  by  the  World's  Fair 
of  1893,  as  indicated  by  the  vote  given  on  page  16  of  this  pamphlet.  It  will  therefore  be 
seen  that  while  Chicago  has  gained  and  is  gaining  tremendously  on  New  York  alone,  yet 
notwithstanding  its  annexation  of  far  distaut  suburbs,  its  boom  received  from  the  World's 
Fair,  it  falls  greatly  behind  the  increase  of  Greater  New  York  population  in  the  same  years. 
If  we  then  add  to  the  population  of  New  York,  Kings  County  and  Long  Island  City,  their 
natural  growth  since  1890,  in  the  same  ratio  shown  by  the  census  of  1890  over  that  of  1880, 
it  gives  the  consolidated  city  in  the  year  1895  a  population  of  3,038,307,  not  counting  other 
territory  likely  to  be  annexed.  Therefore  the  consolidation  of  cities  into  the  Greater  New 
York  not  only  saves  New  York  its  prestige  and  metropolitan  business,  but  secures  it  for  all 
time  to  come :  And  the  persons  who  will  be  the  most  benefited  are  the  working  classes  and 
rent-payers. 


31 


TESTIMONIALS. 

The  following  testimonials  selected  from  several  hundred  are  printed 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  the  proposed  reduction  of  Brooklyn  taxes 
by  equalizing  them  writh  New  York  taxes  in  a  consolidated  city,  having 
been  the  means  of  overcoming  Brooklyn  opposition  to  consolidation,  de- 
scribed on  pages  5  to  9  of  this  pamphlet,  the  Brooklyn  voter  may  therefore 
safely  take  it  for  granted  that  a  vote  for  consolidation  means  for  consoli- 
dation of  New  York  and  Brooklyn  into  one  city,  having  an  equal  and 
uniform  rate  of  taxation. 

For  Brooklyn  to  vote  against  consolidation,  would  put  an  end  to  all 
possibility  of  obtaining  reduction  of  Brooklyn  taxes  by  equalizing  them 
with  New  York's  in  one  city:  And  for  New  York  to  vote  against  con- 
solidation would  be  suicidal,  for  the  reasons  given  on  pages  15  to  20  of 
this  pamphlet. 

Hon.  Andrew  H.  Green,  President  of  the  Consolidation  Commis- 
sion, in  a  speech  before  the  Brooklyn  Real  Estate  Exchange,  said : 

"That  your  taxes  are  disproportionately  large  and  that  they  can  be  reduced  is  clearly 
shown  by  the  able  pamphlet  wf  Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq.,  who  has  kindly  volunteered  to  aid 
the  Commission  by  a  thorough  investigation  of  this  subject  of  taxation  in  Brooklyn." 

What  Judge  Wm.  J.  Gaynor  says:  _  _ 

°  •/  Supreme  Court  Chambers, 

My  dear  Mr.  Graves  :  Brooklyn,  April  5th,  1894. 

I  understand  that  you  are  going  to  get  up  a  second  pamphlet.  I  know  of  no  one  so 
competent  to  get  out  a  pamphlet  on  consolidation,  and  especially  on  that  phrase  of  the 
question  which  involves  the  comparative  taxation  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  as  yourself. 

You  were  the  first  one  to  direct  attention  thereto  in  connection  with  the  question  of 
consolidation.  There  will  not  be  many  in  Brooklyn  in  favor  of  consolidation  for  any  mere  sen- 
timental or  fanciful  reasons.  v  .  , 

To  Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq.  ^  ^  *•  «~ 

From  the  President  of  the  Emigrant  Industrial  Savings  Bank  of 
New  York,  Treasurer  of  the  Consolidation  League  of  Brooklyn : 

Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq.  : 

Bear  Sir :  During  a  thirty-five  year  residence  in  Brooklyn,  I  have  always  believed 
in  ultimate  union  of  these  two  cities.  But  the  consolidation  movement  has  needed  leaders  to 
agitate  the  question.  In  your  first  pamphlet  you  show  the  practicability  of  this  movement 
and  the  great  benefit  that  will  flow  to  the  tax-payers  and  rent-payers  from  such  union,  and 
that  the  time  has  arrived  when  this  union  should  take  place. 

This  is  admitted  on  all  sides.  I  have  just  read  your  second  pamphlet.  I  consider  your 
treatment  of  the  subject  most  admirable.  I  had  believed  myself  thoroughly  well  informed  on 
the  merits  of  the  consolidation  of  these  two  great  cities,  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  and  thought 
that  I  had  thoroughly  weighed,  analyzed  and  duly  considered  the  advantages  that  would 
accrue  to  each,  but  you  have  thrown  so  much  new  light  on  the  subject  that  I  am  amazed. 

Emigrant  Industrial  Savings  Bank,  1  am'  veiy  tru1^  yours'       James  McMahw. 

May  8th,  1894. 

From  President  of  Sprague  National  Bank : 
Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq.  :  Brooklyn,  April  16th,  1894. 

Dear  Sir  :  Rumors  have  reached  me  that  you  intend  writing  a  second  pamphlet  on  the 
advantages  to  be  derived  from  consolidation  of  the  cities  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn. 

I  want  to  say  that  your  first  pamphlet  was  a  grand  success.  It  caused  every  reader  to 
stop  and  reason  with  himself  upon  the  benefits  of  such  annexation  with  equal  taxation  as  a  basis. 
I  am  pleased  to  find  that  almost  without  exception  the  masses  believe  it  is  for  the  benefit 
of  each  city,  and  should  receive  practically  unanimous  consent  of  the  voters  of  both  cities. 

Yours  sincerely,  N>  ^  SpRAGUE. 


32 


From  Chairman  Executive  Committee,  Consolidation  League: 
Edward  C.  Graves. 

Dear  Sir: — Your  first  pamphlet  "How  to  reduce  Brooklyn  taxes  one-half  by  consoli- 
dation of  the  cities,"  was  a  complete  discussion  of  the  matter  as  it  then  stood.  In  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  past  two  years  it  has  been  the  general  text-book  and  encyclopedia.  It  was 
especially  valuable  because  in  it  you  were  the  first  to  intelligently  develop  the  facts  about 
Brooklyn  taxation,  and  to  show  their  relation  to  consolidation,  or  more  exactly  that  consoli- 
dation is  the  only  remedy  for  Brooklyn's  tax  difficulties. 

Yours  very  truly, 

- '       Edward  M.  Grout. 

From  the  rubber  manufacturing  firm  of  Parker,  Stearns  &  Sutton. 
Edward  C.  Graves. 

Dear  Sir : — I  desire  to  say  that  I  have  lived  in  Brooklyn  about  forty  years,  and  until  you 
brought  out  and  developed  the  Brooklyn  tax  and  water  front  questions,  and  in  your  famous 
pamphlet  "An  Appeal  to  Reason  or  How  Taxes  in  Brooklyn  can  be  reduced  one-half,"  showed 
and  proved  that  the  only  possible  cure  for  Brooklyn's  constantly  increasing  tax-rate  is  consolida- 
tion of  the  cities,  there  never  wras  any  consolidation  sentiment  in  Brooklyn  worth  mentioning. 

That  pamphlet  is  doing  the  business.  The  fact  that  up  to  January  1st,  1894,  sixty 
thousand  copies  have  been  distributed  in  Brooklyn  from  hand  to  hand  without  any  adver- 
tising, and  that  so  far  as  appearances  show  those  copies  were  not  destroyed,  but  were  care- 
fully read,  then  put  away  by  the  reader  for  future  reference,  and  that  not  a  single  opponent 
of  consolidation  has  been  able  to  contradict  one  line  of  it,  tells  the  story.  Awaiting  the  pub- 
lication of  your  second  pamphlet  with  anticipation  of  great  pleasure  in  reading  it,  I  am,  dear  Sir, 

Very  truly  yours,  RUSSELL  Parker. 

From  the  Secretary  of  the  Brooklyn  Real  Estate  Exchange: 

Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq. 

Dear  Sir : — I  desire  to  express  to  you  my  appreciation  of  your  efforts  to  educate  the 
people  of  Brooklyn  to  a  proper  understanding  of  the  advantages  to  be  gained  by  consolida- 
tion. The  facts  as  presented  in  your  first  pamphlet  have  carried  conviction  to  hundreds  and 
thousands  of  our  people,  and  as  a  reference  book  it  has  proved  almost  invaluable. 

Yours  truly,  George  w  ChaunckY. 

From  the  Secretary  of  the  Brooklyn  Consolidation  League. 

Edward  C.  Graves,  Esq., 

Dear  Sir: — On  the  first  day  for  payment  of  the  Brooklyn  taxes  for  year  1894,  I  placed 
two  men  on  the  steps  in  front  of  the  tax-collectors  office,  and  as  each  tax-payer,  man  or 
woman,  walked  up  to  pay  his  or  her  taxes,  then  found  to  be  higher  than  ever  before,  he  or 
she  was  handed  a  copy  of  your  now  famous  pamphlet  "How  taxes  in  Brooklyn  can  be 
reduced  one-half  by  consolidation  of  the  cities."  In  that  way  I  placed  in  the  hands  of  tax- 
payers only,  in  one  week,  from  December  1st  to  December  8th,  1893,  11,500  copies  of  your 
pamphlet.  No  person  was  permitted  to  have  more  than  one  copy.  The  effect  of  this  was  truly 
marvelous.  At  one  time  I  saw  more  than  one  hundred  people  standing  around  the  City  Hall 
Square  reading  your  document.  I  watched  carefully  and  so  far  as  I  could  see  or  learn  not  a 
single  copy  was  thrown  away  or  wasted.  On  the  contrary,  the  people  demanded  them  and 
struggled  to  get  them.  And  from  the  determined  look  on  each  face  and  casual  remarks 
made  by  the  people,  one  could  see  that  it  was  good  seed  well  sown. 

It  was  most  interesting,  indeed,  to  stand  one  side  and  witness  the  slow  formation  of 
that  mighty  power.  American  public  opinion. 

Your  successful  solution  of  the  Brooklyn  tax  question  is  certainly  the  key  to  the  consoli- 
dation movement,  overcoming  Brooklvn  opposition  and  slowly  but  6urely  uniting  the  cities. 

Very  truly  yours,    Sanders  Shanks,  Sec'y  C.  L. 

A  highly  interesting  and  instructive  pamphlet. — JY.  Y.  World. 

Thirty  thousand  copies  of  Edward  C.  Graves'  consolidation  pamphlet:  "How  taxes 
in  Brooklyn  can  be  reduced  one-half"  were  distributed  by  the  Consolidation  League  in 
Brooklyn  during  the  fall  campaign  of  1893,  and  greatly  aided  in  the  result. — X.  T.  Recorder. 

We  print  on  another  page  several  columns  of  extracts  from  Edward  C.  Graves'  con- 
solidation pamphlet:  "An  Appeal  to  Reason,  or  How  to  reduce  Brooklyn  taxes  one-half."" 
Mr.  Graves  begins  at  the  other  end  as  it  were,  and  limits  his  observations  to  the  single  point: 
"  How  to  reduce  Brooklyn  taxes."  Ask  any  person  what  he  thinks  of  such  possibility  and 
practically  the  entire  body  of  citizens  would  reply  with  Artemus  Ward :  "it  would  be  a 
6weet  boon."  Its  style  is  clear,  straight -forward  and  simple,  that  of  a  man  who  knows 
thoroughly  his  subject  and  believes  what  he  knows.  There  are  no  theories  or  speculations- 
in  Mr.  Graves'  paper:  the  facts,  nothing  but  the  facts  are  there,  and  they  must  be  met  if  met 
at  all  by  material  of  the  same  sort. — Brooklyn  Standard  Union. 


